Memorandum submitted by the Biosciences
Federation
ABOUT US
The Biosciences Federation (BSF) is a single
authority representing the UK's biological expertise, providing
independent opinion to inform public policy and promoting the
advancement of the biosciences. The Federation brings together
the strengths of 44 member organisations (plus seven associate
members), including the Institute of Biology and the British Ecological
Society.
The Institute of Biology (IOB) is an independent
and charitable body charged by Royal Charter to further the study
and application of the UK's biology and allied biosciences. IOB
has 14,000 individual members and many specialist learned
Affiliated Societies.
Together, BSF and IOB represent a cumulative
membership of over 65,000 individuals, covering the full
spectrum of biosciences from physiology and neuroscience, biochemistry
and microbiology, to ecology, taxonomy and environmental science.
The British Ecological Society (BES) is the
learned society for ecology in the UK. Founded in 1913 and with
over 4,000 members, the BES supports ecologists and promotes
ecology; the study of living things and their relationship with
the environment in which they live. The Society's mission is to
advance ecology and make it count.
AUTHORS OF
THIS RESPONSE
This response was developed through the IOB/BSF
Environment, Agriculture and Sustainability committee and the
Public and Policy Committee of the British Ecological Society.
OPENNESS
The IOB, BSF and the BES welcome the opportunity
to respond to this call for information and are happy for this
submission to be made publicly available. Should the Committee
have any questions about this submission, please direct them to
the British Ecological Society (www.BritishEcologicalSociety.org,
telephone 020 7877 0740).
TOPICS TO
CONSIDER
The IOB, BSF and the BES would like to see the
EFRA Committee examine the following issues as part of its inquiry,
in addition to those named in the Committee's initial call for
information. We are strongly supportive of the Committee's decision
to include Defra's agencies within the scope of the inquiry. Throughout
we take "Defra" to mean both the Department and organisations
in the Defra "family".
Commissioning Research
1. Is Defra an intelligent customer for
procuring research from internal and external contractors?
2. Does Defra support the right strategic
science to inform policy, including long-term research (5-10 years
in duration)?
3. The tension between research freedom,
for scientists wishing to pursue interesting lines of enquiry,
and the provision of funding by Defra for target-oriented projects.
4. Does Defra feel its approach to its work
gives it access to the best scientific minds and appropriate access
to scientific networks? If it does not, what plans does it have
to gain access to such resources—including support for national
infrastructure and the development of a skilled workforce?
5. Does Defra make adequate use of Horizon-scanning
to identify novel threats and opportunities for which environmental
science will be needed in the future?[17]
For example; extreme events, outbreaks of disease, food security
and agricultural productivity. How can opportunities be created
for the UK research community and Defra work together to tackle
these?
6. When commissioning reviews of evidence,
how does Defra ensure a repeatable and critical assessment that
uses methodology designed to minimise error and bias, such as
that used routinely in health care?
Using Research
7. Who are Defra's main research partners
and what do such partnerships bring to the work of Defra? What
does Defra bring to the partnerships in terms of knowledge, policy
context and financial investment?
8. How does Defra strike a balance between
science inputs to the evidence base and inputs from other forms
of evidence (such as opinion)?
Structure and Governance
9. Is Defra's structure too complex; does
it allow for the best possible co-ordination and use of science
within the Department? The silo-based organisation of Defra
has the potential to stymie the initiation and development of
cross-cutting projects.
10. How open is Defra currently to the use
of peer-review for grant funding and contracts? Mechanisms
for engaging the scientific community with peer-review in this
context could be explored.
11. The role of the Defra Chief Scientific
Adviser (CSA) in the Department's decision-making and policy-making,
the degree of the post-holder's access to Ministers and the level
of the research budget at their disposal.
12. The relationship between Defra and the
devolved administrations including: the relationship between the
Defra CSA and scientific advisors in devolved government; the
relationship between Defra and environmental research institutes
in the devolved nations (ie Institute of Grassland and Environmental
Research and the Scottish Government Rural and Environment Research
and Analysis Directorate (RERAD) research providers).
Policy-making
13. The relationship between the policy-making
process in Defra and Government and overall UK science policy.
At which points in the policy making process is scientific
advice sought? How and to what degree are Ministers able take
account of scientific evidence? Is Defra's science framework sufficiently
detached from political pressure and "spin"?
14. How will the new Committee on Climate
Change be supported by science and research and to what extent
will Defra's Ministers be obliged to accept advice from the Committee?
Funding
15. Budget cuts and frequent re-organisation
within Defra. Nationally significant science projects and skilled
teams of experts must be protected long-term, from the negative
impacts of organisational change on national capacity and capability.
16. Does Defra have an adequate science
budget to fund the policy-relevant research that it needs, for
example within its priority areas of climate change and the ecosystem
approach?
March 2008
17 Sutherland, W J et al (2008) Future novel
threats and opportunities facing UK biodiversity identified by
horizon scanning. Journal of Applied Ecology. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01474.x Back
| 
